Auswirkung der Gruppengröße auf die Entwicklung der Ovarien bei Hummel-Arbeiterinnen (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Bombus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CNAANI J, WONG A & THOMSON J D [Dep Zool, Univ Toronto, Ont, Canada]: Effect of Group Size on Ovarian Development in Bumblebee Workers (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Bombus). - Entomol Gener 29(2/4): 305-314; Stuttgart 2007-01. --- [Note] Isolated bumblebee workers. Bombus impatiens Cresson 1863, developed their ovaries to produce laying-sized eggs in 11 days, but did so 5 days faster in queenless groups of 2-12 that they came to dominate. In groups larger than pairs, reproductive dominance (as measured by oocyte length) was distributed continuously in a graded hierarchy, rather than dichotomously. In groups, workers at a particular dominance rank position developed larger oocytes as group size increased, indicating that a focal bee's stimulus for reproductive development depends on the number of other bees that are subordinate to it. Attempts to relate ovarian development to visible behavioral manifestations of dominance were inconclusive because antagonistic interaction were infrequent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".